Gros Membres! Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 Gros, are you at the veracity of my info or at being surprised, like I definitely was, to remember that Nate Burleson of all people had more TD catches than all of those bigger name/more highly (fantasy) regarded dudes? http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats;jse...mp;d-447263-p=1 Completely surprised (dumbfounded, actually) and not doubting the veracity one bit. Its enough to make me want to take Burleson over any of those guys this year... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 (edited) For sure. But its also good to remember that 52 NFL receivers had more receiving yards. Granted, Burleson did a lot with the 50 receptions TD-wise, but his 52.6% reception ratio and almost 700 yards left a lot to be desired. And it wasn't like he didn't get targeted in the passing game (95 targets - 47th most last year). No one is drafting Burleson early and I think he's a great value for where he can be had. But if this year is anything like last year he'll have more value in TD-heavy, non-PPR leagues. Burleson spent considerable time last year as the #3/4 WR receiving option in the offense. Hackett is gone, Branch is probably going to miss ~ 6 games, and Engram is a year older. Burleson is not slated to be returning punts and kickoffs this year because he is going into the season as a primary WR target. This year isn't shaping up like last year. I'd still take Engram first in PPR leagues, but I wouldn't bet the farm on Bobby E the highest scoring WR on the Hawks this year. If Nate was the 47th targeted WR last year and placed 52 among receiving yards, I see some upside for fantasy scoring potential. Edited August 6, 2008 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 (edited) Burleson's no Reggie Williams(10 TD's to Burleson's 9). Just goes to show any blind squirrel... Kind of a good point actually, Williams TD to reception ratio was extremely slanted. Burleson and Williams may be of similar skill sets but I'll take the guy starting in a pass first WCO over a guy who seeming fluctuates from WR1-WR5 on a run first offense. Edited August 6, 2008 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gros Membres! Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 If Nate was the 47th targeted WR last year and placed 52 among receiving yards, I see some upside for fantasy scoring potential. Nate is ALL upside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 I know. That is kind of my point. He is really unproven. isn't that what a sleeper is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 If Nate was the 47th targeted WR last year and placed 52 among receiving yards, I see some upside for fantasy scoring potential. I do too. It's the low reception ratio that keeps me from reaching for him. But he's certainly someone I'm targeting; I owned him in 2 or 3 leagues last year and liked what I got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 Nate is ALL upside. Of course, but we are talking about sleepers and in a limited role last year he performed and was Hass's preferred red zone target. Somebody, besides 35 year-old Bobby Engram, will likely catch a lot of passes in Seattle this year. I like him relative to a lot of other guys going around his ADP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 Burleson's no Reggie Williams(10 TD's to Burleson's 9). Just goes to show any blind squirrel... Kind of a good point actually, Williams TD to reception ratio was extremely slanted. Burleson and Williams may be of similar skill sets but I'll take the guy starting in a pass first WCO over a guy who seeming fluctuates from WR1-WR5 on a run first offense. Yeah, I had to look that one up. I thought "no f'in way Williams had 10 TDs last year"... isn't that what a sleeper is? No, not necessarily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gasface Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Vincent Jackson... again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Vincent Jackson... again. Yeah I don't get why anyone would even consider this guy as a breakout candidate (or... "sleeper"). He's on a team that really does look to run first, and when they DO pass, they have one of the best pass-catching backs in the league, one of the best - if not THE best - tight ends in the game, and a solid pass-catcher in Chris Chambers. Where exactly does "V-Jax" fit in there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Yeah I don't get why anyone would even consider this guy as a breakout candidate (or... "sleeper"). He's on a team that really does look to run first, and when they DO pass, they have one of the best pass-catching backs in the league, one of the best - if not THE best - tight ends in the game, and a solid pass-catcher in Chris Chambers. Where exactly does "V-Jax" fit in there? I disagree....he's 6'5" and has decent speed with a good QB that just happened to go retarded for a year.... I still think he won't break out, but he definitely has the tools to do so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 I disagree....he's 6'5" and has decent speed with a good QB that just happened to go retarded for a year.... I still think he won't break out, but he definitely has the tools to do so... So what? He was 6'5" and had decent speed last year and the year before. He's had 27 and 41 receptions. Why would this year be any different? He's still the fourth option on a team that runs a lot. I see what you're saying, he has the tools to break out.. but he won't... and therefore, will remain "asleep". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Jackson may BE 6'5", but Chambers PLAYS 6'5". Push. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Stanky Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 So what? He was 6'5" and had decent speed last year and the year before. He's had 27 and 41 receptions. Why would this year be any different? He's still the fourth option on a team that runs a lot. I see what you're saying, he has the tools to break out.. but he won't... and therefore, will remain "asleep". VJacks chance to breakout depends on Gates big toe. If Gates just isn't right then Jackson will get more looks. I would go as far as to say more looks than Chambers. He would assume the vacated role of Gates over the middle. Just look at the stats that Jackson put up in the playoffs: Against Ten 5 for 114 and TD Against Indy 7 for 93 and TD Against NE 6 for 93 I'm waiting to see how gates looks in the preseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 VJacks chance to breakout depends on Gates big toe. If Gates just isn't right then Jackson will get more looks. I would go as far as to say more looks than Chambers. He would assume the vacated role of Gates over the middle. Just look at the stats that Jackson put up in the playoffs: Against Ten 5 for 114 and TD Against Indy 7 for 93 and TD Against NE 6 for 93 I'm waiting to see how gates looks in the preseason. That very well could be true, but I'm guessing Gates gets healthy by early September. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.